Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
144 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
46 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Artificial Intelligence in the Knowledge Economy (2312.05481v12)

Published 9 Dec 2023 in econ.TH

Abstract: AI can transform the knowledge economy by automating non-codifiable work. To analyze this transformation, we incorporate AI into an economy where humans form hierarchical organizations: Less knowledgeable individuals become "workers" doing routine work, while others become "solvers" handling exceptions. We model AI as a technology that converts computational resources into "AI agents" that operate autonomously (as co-workers and solvers/co-pilots) or non-autonomously (solely as co-pilots). Autonomous AI primarily benefits the most knowledgeable individuals; non-autonomous AI benefits the least knowledgeable. However, output is higher with autonomous AI. These findings reconcile contradictory empirical evidence and reveal tradeoffs when regulating AI autonomy.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (30)
  1. Acemoglu, D. and D. Autor (2011): “Chapter 12 - Skills, Tasks and Technologies: Implications for Employment and Earnings,” Elsevier, vol. 4 of Handbook of Labor Economics, 1043–1171.
  2. Acemoglu, D. and J. Loebbing (2024): “Automation and Polarization,” National Bureau of Economic Research.
  3. Acemoglu, D. and P. Restrepo (2018): “The Race Between Man and Machine: Implications of Technology for Growth, Factor Shares, and Employment,” American Economic Review, 108, 1488–1542.
  4. Aghion, P., B. F. Jones, and C. I. Jones (2017): “Artificial Intelligence and Economic Growth,” Working Paper 23928, National Bureau of Economic Research.
  5. Alfred Sloan (1924): “The Most Important Thing I Ever Learned about Management,” System: The Magazine of Business, 194, 140–141.
  6. Antràs, P., L. Garicano, and E. Rossi-Hansberg (2006): “Offshoring in a Knowledge Economy,” The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 121, 31–77.
  7. Autor, D. (2024): “Applying AI to Rebuild Middle Class Jobs,” National Bureau of Economic Research.
  8. Azar, J., M. Chugunova, K. Keller, and S. Samila (2023): “Monopsony and Automation,” Max Planck Institute for Innovation & Competition Research Paper No. 23-21.
  9. Brynjolfsson, E. (2022): “The Turing Trap: The Promise & Peril of Human-Like Artificial Intelligence,” Daedalus, 151, 272–287.
  10. Brynjolfsson, E., D. Li, and L. R. Raymond (2023): “Generative AI at work,” Tech. rep., National Bureau of Economic Research.
  11. Caicedo, S., J. Lucas, Robert E., and E. Rossi-Hansberg (2019): “Learning, Career Paths, and the Distribution of Wages,” American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, 11, 49–88.
  12. Caliendo, L., G. Mion, L. D. Opromolla, and E. Rossi-Hansberg (2020): “Productivity and Organization in Portuguese Firms,” Journal of Political Economy, 128, 4211–4257.
  13. Caliendo, L., F. Monte, and E. Rossi-Hansberg (2015): “The Anatomy of French Production Hierarchies,” Journal of Political Economy, 123, 809–852.
  14. Caliendo, L. and E. Rossi-Hansberg (2012): “The Impact of Trade on Organization and Productivity,” The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 127, 1393–1467.
  15. Carmona, G. and K. Laohakunakorn (Forthcoming): “Improving the Organization of Knowledge in Production by Screening Problems,” Journal of Political Economy.
  16. Eeckhout, J. and P. Kircher (2018): “Assortative Matching with Large Firms,” Econometrica, 86, 85–132.
  17. Eloundou, T., S. Manning, P. Mishkin, and D. Rock (2023): “Gpts are gpts: An early look at the labor market impact potential of large language models,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.10130.
  18. Fuchs, W., L. Garicano, and L. Rayo (2015): “Optimal Contracting and the Organization of Knowledge,” The Review of Economic Studies, 82, 632–658.
  19. Garicano, L. (2000): “Hierarchies and the Organization of Knowledge in Production,” Journal of Political Economy, 108, 874–904.
  20. Garicano, L. and T. Hubbard (2007): “Managerial Leverage Is Limited by the Extent of the Market: Hierarchies, Specialization, and the Utilization of Lawyers’ Human Capital,” The Journal of Law & Economics, 50, 1–43.
  21. Garicano, L. and E. Rossi-Hansberg (2004): “Inequality and the Organization of Knowledge,” American Economic Review Papers and Proceedings, 94, 197–202.
  22. ——— (2006): “Organization and Inequality in a Knowledge Economy,” The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 121, 1383–1435.
  23. ——— (2012): “Organizing growth,” Journal of Economic Theory, 147, 623–656.
  24. ——— (2015): “Knowledge-Based Hierarchies: Using Organizations to Understand the Economy,” Annual Review of Economics, 7, 1–30.
  25. Hayek, F. A. (1945): “The Use of Knowledge in Society,” The American Economic Review, 35, 519–530.
  26. Meserole, C. O. (2018): “What is Machine Learning?” Tech. rep., Brookings Institution.
  27. Muro, M., J. Whiton, and R. Maxim (2019): “What Jobs are Affected by AI?” Tech. rep., Brookings Institution.
  28. Thomson Reuters (2021): “The Business Case for AI-Enabled Legal Technology,” .
  29. Webb, M. (2020): “The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on the Labor Market,” Working Paper.
  30. Zeira, J. (1998): “Workers, Machines, and Economic Growth,” The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 113, 1091–1117.

Summary

  • The paper introduces a dual-purpose model that distinguishes between autonomous and non-autonomous AI roles, clarifying their unique economic impacts.
  • It finds that autonomous AI boosts productivity while widening income gaps, whereas non-autonomous AI mitigates inequality among workers.
  • The analysis implies that strategic AI integration reshapes firm structures and labor dynamics, informing both policy decisions and organizational adaptation.

Artificial Intelligence in the Knowledge Economy

This paper explores the transformative role of AI within the knowledge economy, proposing a structured framework that encapsulates the dynamic between AI and human labor. It models AI as a versatile technology capable of fulfilling both autonomous and non-autonomous roles, impacting the scale, composition, and productivity of firms. The analysis reveals nuanced insights into how AI reshapes occupational stratification, firm organization, and income distribution, dependent on its integration into various economic roles.

Key Contributions

  1. AI as a Dual-Purpose Technology: The paper introduces a model that treats AI as a dual-purpose technology, capable of both independent decision-making (autonomous) and supportive roles (non-autonomous). This distinction is crucial as it provides a more comprehensive understanding of AI's economic impact, distinguishing it from traditional automation technologies which mainly focus on routinized task execution.
  2. Structural Changes in Firms: The research identifies that AI affects firm dynamics by altering their size, productivity, and decentralization. In scenarios where AI functions autonomously, highly knowledgeable individuals tend to leverage AI to solve complex problems, while less knowledgeable workers may face job displacement or reduced bargaining power due to AI's scalability and efficiency.
  3. Autonomous vs. Non-Autonomous AI: One significant observation is that non-autonomous AI disproportionately benefits less knowledgeable individuals by reducing inequality. In contrast, autonomous AI tends to favor more knowledgeable individuals, enhancing disparities but increasing overall output. This dichotomy highlights crucial considerations for policymakers concerning AI regulation and labor market outcomes.
  4. Occupational Displacement and Income Distribution: The displacement effects hinge on AI's level of knowledge. AI that replicates the capabilities of human workers displaces them toward specialized problem-solving, while AI with solver-level capabilities relocates humans toward routine tasks. The paper emphasizes these shifts profoundly impact the distribution of knowledge work and, consequently, income inequality within the economy.

Implications and Future Prospects

The implications of AI in the knowledge economy are substantial and multifaceted:

  • Policy and Regulation: The findings suggest that policymakers need to weigh the trade-offs between productivity gains and inequality exacerbation when formulating AI regulations. Specifically, the choice between promoting autonomous versus non-autonomous AI could dictate broader socio-economic outcomes.
  • Organizational Adaptation: Firms must adapt to the capabilities of AI, optimizing their organizational structures to harness the benefits of AI while mitigating adverse effects on the workforce. This adaptation includes rethinking training and skilling programs to help workers transition into roles where human oversight complements AI capabilities.
  • Theoretical Contributions: The model enriches the literature on knowledge hierarchies and automation, bridging gaps between AI’s unique capabilities and traditional economic models of automation. It also challenges existing paradigms by showing that AI’s effects are contingent on its autonomy and problem-solving capabilities, warranting further exploration.
  • Expanding AI’s Economic Role: As AI technologies advance, their integration into the economy could deepen, affecting various sectors differently. Future research could extend beyond knowledge-intensive industries to encompass sectors traditionally shielded from automation.

In conclusion, this paper offers a nuanced understanding of how AI technologies will increasingly influence economic landscapes. By distinguishing between AI’s autonomous and non-autonomous roles, it lays the groundwork for informed decision-making in both business and policy domains, highlighting the need for a balanced approach to harness AI's potential.

File Document Download Save Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com PDF File Document Download Save Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Markdown
Youtube Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

YouTube